The problem of the Green River Formation

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I'll still hang around and see if you EVER "teach" anything. I won't hold my breath.

(And if you try to teach something that isn't technically accurate you can be sure that some of us will help correct you. Perhaps it will moderate your haughty spirit.)

He'll probably be back, and judging by his posts in other areas, if he does make any substantive claims, they're likely to be ludicrous, absurd, or both. But a change for the better would be welcome, if unexpected.

 

[Job 33:6]

Anyone else have any interesting formations that they'd like to share? Be them in support of young earth or an old earth?

 

[dad]

A major reason I stopped being a young-earth creationist is because it seemed that the Green River formation looked liked it was millions of years old - at least not a few thousand years old.

Creationists disagree about whether it formed during or after the flood:

Difficulties with a Flood model for the Green River Formation
"...the data clearly indicate the GRF was deposited within lakes, after the Flood"

Answers in Genesis - Green River Formation Very Likely Did Not Form in a Postdiluvial Lake

An article about the GRF by an old-earth creationist:
Creationist Misuse of the Green River Formation

For YECs: do you think it was formed during the flood or after?

AIG cites the deposit as Eocene so I would say post flood.

The article you cited at AIG also questions whether they are varves or rhythmites, apparently because they feel fish found between layers would have rot in a few weeks, and there is some claimed variance in ash layers.

Since you chose a uniformitarian view I assume you have answers to those claims?